General question: If I am going through the CC and occasionally drill real questions... should I also be attending classes or working on full sections? What is recommended while I learn the basics?
@Kellbell206 I would finish CC first, then do some drilling without overdoing it and make sure you understand each problem. When you feel ready, start adding in full practice tests no more than once a week or at most two or three sections per week. In my opinion, CC and drilling are more important at the beginning than just doing practice tests and sections. I’ve found class is the least helpful, but you can attend if you want.
Everyone is different, so the biggest takeaway is to do what you can do consistently. If that means attending classes or only being able to do CC, then do that. Consistency is key.
For the example, "Many birds that migrate south in the fall do not return in the spring." And you make the two sets. Can someone explain why the set of "birds that do not return in the spring" is only an intersection and not fully encapsulated by the first set "birds that migrate south in fall."
At first I thought, how can you return in the spring if you don't at first migrate in the fall? But I guess, there may be birds who return in the spring who migrated in the winter or 10 years ago?
@CamilleHodgkins Not all birds that 'don't return in spring' fall into the category of birds who migrate south. The word that feels a little strange to me is 'return', because return implies that they at some point left the place they would be 'returning' to. So, it can fall into how you're looking at the groups. The more I think about it, there could also be birds who migrate north, east, west, etc. (does that happen?) and 'return' to the original location in the spring. So those birds would fall into the category of 'birds who return in spring' but they didn't migrate south.
Hi! I don't know about all the inferences you can make about B & C from those statements, but your question reminded me of these 2 parallel flaw questions:
wow was the rat poison comment really necessary. I thought you were a nice person. Now I know you are a person who thinks it's okay to joke about torturing and killing animals and probably also okay to actually torture and kill them. Why introduce this into an LSAT practice? It is a sickening distraction.
Can someone explain to me how the sentence "Many birds that migrate south in the fall do not return in the spring" differs at all from "Of birds that migrate south in the fall, many do not return in the spring"? To me, these appear to be the same, since both seem to imply that, when talking about birds that return in the spring, we are only talking about the birds that migrated south, which would make it a subset instead of an intersection, no? I don't think the "many" refers to the birds that migrate, rather, the birds that return.
By phrasing it "Of birds that migrate south in the fall," it becomes a superset/subset relationship rather than an intersecting set relationship. The word "Many" does not impose a limitation on the birds being considered to return in the spring. The word "Of" DOES impose a limitation, because you are restricting your conclusion to birds within the set of those that migrate south. "Many" yields no such restriction.
that would imply that there are birds that "return in the spring" that are outside the overlap, meaning they do not migrate south in the fall. To be that is nonsensical because of the wording of return. So I think this makes more sense as a subset/superset. Can the relationship be expressed both ways? Does this mean that all intersecting sets could be expressed as sub and supersets? can we view it as a modifier in most cases?
Does anyone know what the meaning of Indicator in "indicator or qualifier" here means? I know the definition of qualifier here is "A quantifier is a word that usually goes before a noun to express the quantity of the object; for example, a little milk." but what would be the meaning of indicator here? I dont believe its referring to it as an indicator word.
It's referring to "indicator" as we talked about indicators for sufficient and necessary conditions i.e., words that indicate that overlapping or intersecting sets are present.
Starting the video talking and howing superset and subset circles made me think throughout the video that all small circles were the subsets and all large circles were the supersets.
In the third example, is it a reasonable assumption to say that the groups could be Students in Mrs. Stoops's class and (Students in Mrs. Stoops's class) who can read rather than Students in Mrs. Stoops's class and (People who) can read?
Yes, but the video explicitly asks you to create two different sets that intersect (overlap) one another. The way you described it you created a subset -> superset relationship :)
Many birds that migrate south in the fall do not return in the spring.
In this case why wouldn't birds that "do not return in the spring" just be a subset of "birds that migrate south in the fall"? Since, you can not return some place you weren't before.
I understand the expression "many" is a signifier, but does adding the word return cancel it out or does the word return not matter if there is the signifier?
ok, after watching the full video I think it can be expressed in more than one way. The birds who do not return in the spring (who also migrate south) are a subset of the birds who migrate south. However, since we aren't supposed to incorporate real world knowlegde into these arguments, I guess it can't be assumed that all birds who do not return actually flew south. In this hypothetical there may be birds who flew in other directions.
Possibly. As far as I know, the LSAT requires a little bit of the suspension of disbelief to get their points across.
But, to play the devil's advocate, 'birds that don't return in the spring' could also refer to birds that migrate north in the fall, or west in summer, or east in springs, or even just west in fall. Not all birds that migrate do so in the fall, and among those, a section of them don't return in the spring.
Except in this example I think it can be inferred that all the birds that don't return are birds that migrated south to begin with because it is only talking about the birds that migrated south. Unless I'm wrong, I believe it states that "of birds that migrate south, many don't return".
That makes sense. If the set were written as "birds that do not return in the spring after a southern migration in the fall", then it would make sense for it to be a subset rather than intersecting set. But this isn't the case here.
This is basically the same concept as the first example about mice. One of the sets is "things living in this house" rather than "mice living in this house", so they intersect rather than one being completely subsumed by the other.
Yeah I am thinking the same thing. Return clearly implies this is a subset superset relationship. otherwise we would have a set that is "birds that did not migrate south in the fall but did return [north] in the spring" that seems nonsensical. maybe I'm pursumng the North part and the set is just any bird that returns to where it left no matter where?
Is this the only section under "Intersecting Sects"? The scheduling tool says this is supposed to take 2 hours, but this lesson says its section 0 of 0 and the entire concept will take 1m....
The inconsistencies between the study scheduler and the syllabus are confusing...
Is this necessary for Logic reasoning? Im a visual learner (hence why I opted for 7sage instead of LSAT demon) and reading all these for nothing, can someone tell me to what extend this lesson is relevant towards LR and RC?
Just a note as someone on review, I don't think those charts represent these relationships all that well. Just because most jedi are very powerful doesn't mean most powerful things are jedi- keep in mind if you're new that the circle for powerful things could be fully consumer or ten times as big in these intersections. These groups intersect but doesn't mean they have to be equally overlapping.
from my understanding of the concept, i believe the graph is more so explaining the intersecting indicator words and how we should view when coming across them
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
40 comments
General question: If I am going through the CC and occasionally drill real questions... should I also be attending classes or working on full sections? What is recommended while I learn the basics?
@Kellbell206 I would finish CC first, then do some drilling without overdoing it and make sure you understand each problem. When you feel ready, start adding in full practice tests no more than once a week or at most two or three sections per week. In my opinion, CC and drilling are more important at the beginning than just doing practice tests and sections. I’ve found class is the least helpful, but you can attend if you want.
Everyone is different, so the biggest takeaway is to do what you can do consistently. If that means attending classes or only being able to do CC, then do that. Consistency is key.
For the example, "Many birds that migrate south in the fall do not return in the spring." And you make the two sets. Can someone explain why the set of "birds that do not return in the spring" is only an intersection and not fully encapsulated by the first set "birds that migrate south in fall."
At first I thought, how can you return in the spring if you don't at first migrate in the fall? But I guess, there may be birds who return in the spring who migrated in the winter or 10 years ago?
@CamilleHodgkins Not all birds that 'don't return in spring' fall into the category of birds who migrate south. The word that feels a little strange to me is 'return', because return implies that they at some point left the place they would be 'returning' to. So, it can fall into how you're looking at the groups. The more I think about it, there could also be birds who migrate north, east, west, etc. (does that happen?) and 'return' to the original location in the spring. So those birds would fall into the category of 'birds who return in spring' but they didn't migrate south.
New module guys let's go
I assume that the concept sufficient and necessary is irrelevant for now?
I’m sorry but I just spent the last 2 minutes laughing at the rat poison comment. Thank you so much for bringing humor to this journey!
On the LSAT, we will often encounter the following expressions of the intersection relationship: "few," "several," "many," "some," "most," etc.
What are all the inferences about B and C that you can make from
All As are B
All As are C
Hi! I don't know about all the inferences you can make about B & C from those statements, but your question reminded me of these 2 parallel flaw questions:
117-4-19
138-2-25
wow was the rat poison comment really necessary. I thought you were a nice person. Now I know you are a person who thinks it's okay to joke about torturing and killing animals and probably also okay to actually torture and kill them. Why introduce this into an LSAT practice? It is a sickening distraction.
LOL
Your making an invalid assumption that making a joke -> believes its okay in real life.
also, get a grip.
isn't most a way of saying the majority? so shouldn't we automatically know at least half of the jedi set intersects with the powerful set?
this was answered 5 seconds after I commented lol
Can someone explain to me how the sentence "Many birds that migrate south in the fall do not return in the spring" differs at all from "Of birds that migrate south in the fall, many do not return in the spring"? To me, these appear to be the same, since both seem to imply that, when talking about birds that return in the spring, we are only talking about the birds that migrated south, which would make it a subset instead of an intersection, no? I don't think the "many" refers to the birds that migrate, rather, the birds that return.
By phrasing it "Of birds that migrate south in the fall," it becomes a superset/subset relationship rather than an intersecting set relationship. The word "Many" does not impose a limitation on the birds being considered to return in the spring. The word "Of" DOES impose a limitation, because you are restricting your conclusion to birds within the set of those that migrate south. "Many" yields no such restriction.
@gabrielfermin54
that would imply that there are birds that "return in the spring" that are outside the overlap, meaning they do not migrate south in the fall. To be that is nonsensical because of the wording of return. So I think this makes more sense as a subset/superset. Can the relationship be expressed both ways? Does this mean that all intersecting sets could be expressed as sub and supersets? can we view it as a modifier in most cases?
@abahar12k I have the exact same thought. Not quite sure if its just a problem with the example or there is a clear reason I am wrong.
Does anyone know what the meaning of Indicator in "indicator or qualifier" here means? I know the definition of qualifier here is "A quantifier is a word that usually goes before a noun to express the quantity of the object; for example, a little milk." but what would be the meaning of indicator here? I dont believe its referring to it as an indicator word.
#help
It's referring to "indicator" as we talked about indicators for sufficient and necessary conditions i.e., words that indicate that overlapping or intersecting sets are present.
Hope that provides some clarification!
Starting the video talking and howing superset and subset circles made me think throughout the video that all small circles were the subsets and all large circles were the supersets.
but I think I'm wrong, right?
I think so too -why can;t they all be subsets?
@blancavilla128841 yeah totally agree. Don't like this way of thinking about it. Why not just do a pie chart
For 3 shouldnt is be at least 2? cause its some students not, like at least one student here, or am i nit picking
In the third example, is it a reasonable assumption to say that the groups could be Students in Mrs. Stoops's class and (Students in Mrs. Stoops's class) who can read rather than Students in Mrs. Stoops's class and (People who) can read?
Yes, but the video explicitly asks you to create two different sets that intersect (overlap) one another. The way you described it you created a subset -> superset relationship :)
With the second example sentence,
Many birds that migrate south in the fall do not return in the spring.
In this case why wouldn't birds that "do not return in the spring" just be a subset of "birds that migrate south in the fall"? Since, you can not return some place you weren't before.
I understand the expression "many" is a signifier, but does adding the word return cancel it out or does the word return not matter if there is the signifier?
ok, after watching the full video I think it can be expressed in more than one way. The birds who do not return in the spring (who also migrate south) are a subset of the birds who migrate south. However, since we aren't supposed to incorporate real world knowlegde into these arguments, I guess it can't be assumed that all birds who do not return actually flew south. In this hypothetical there may be birds who flew in other directions.
Possibly. As far as I know, the LSAT requires a little bit of the suspension of disbelief to get their points across.
But, to play the devil's advocate, 'birds that don't return in the spring' could also refer to birds that migrate north in the fall, or west in summer, or east in springs, or even just west in fall. Not all birds that migrate do so in the fall, and among those, a section of them don't return in the spring.
Except in this example I think it can be inferred that all the birds that don't return are birds that migrated south to begin with because it is only talking about the birds that migrated south. Unless I'm wrong, I believe it states that "of birds that migrate south, many don't return".
I'm having the exact same issue of understanding
That makes sense. If the set were written as "birds that do not return in the spring after a southern migration in the fall", then it would make sense for it to be a subset rather than intersecting set. But this isn't the case here.
This is basically the same concept as the first example about mice. One of the sets is "things living in this house" rather than "mice living in this house", so they intersect rather than one being completely subsumed by the other.
@Rena12345
Yeah I am thinking the same thing. Return clearly implies this is a subset superset relationship. otherwise we would have a set that is "birds that did not migrate south in the fall but did return [north] in the spring" that seems nonsensical. maybe I'm pursumng the North part and the set is just any bird that returns to where it left no matter where?
The video was great and made it easy to understand! Keep em coming and keep up the good work, JY and all the folks at 7Sage!
#help
Is this the only section under "Intersecting Sects"? The scheduling tool says this is supposed to take 2 hours, but this lesson says its section 0 of 0 and the entire concept will take 1m....
The inconsistencies between the study scheduler and the syllabus are confusing...
Is this necessary for Logic reasoning? Im a visual learner (hence why I opted for 7sage instead of LSAT demon) and reading all these for nothing, can someone tell me to what extend this lesson is relevant towards LR and RC?
Relationships can be hard
Just a note as someone on review, I don't think those charts represent these relationships all that well. Just because most jedi are very powerful doesn't mean most powerful things are jedi- keep in mind if you're new that the circle for powerful things could be fully consumer or ten times as big in these intersections. These groups intersect but doesn't mean they have to be equally overlapping.
from my understanding of the concept, i believe the graph is more so explaining the intersecting indicator words and how we should view when coming across them